1 2025:CGHC:39191 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9135 of 2025 1 - Sanjay Sharma S/o Shri C.L. Sharma Aged About 61 Years Presently Posted As In-Charge Superintending Engineer, Hasdeo Project Circle, Rampur, Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan, Sector 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shri Suresh Kumar Pandey S/o Late Shri Radhika Prasad Pandey Posted As Executive Engineer, R/o Yash Villa, Professor Colony, Nehru Nagar (West), Bhilai, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Choubey Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 06/08/2025 1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has obtained graduate degree in Civil Engineering from Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur in the year of 1985. Thereafter, he participated in the selection process for the post of Sub-Engineer and on 29.01.1988, upon successful completion in selection process, he ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.08.07 11:41:50 +0530 2 was appointed on the post of Sub-Engineer under Respondent No.1. On 19.01.2005, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer and again vide order dated 21.06.2022, he was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer w.e.f. 31.12.2021. The Counsel further submits that Respondents No.3 & 4 were appointed as Sub-Engineer on 11.10.1989. He acquired the Engineering Degree on 1985. Further, the issue in respect of grant of seniority to degree holder and diploma holder engineers has already been decided by the Supreme Court. A reliance has been placed by the Counsel in judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of “Ramesh Kumar Choudha & others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others reported in (1996) 11 SCC 242. The Counsel submits that in this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the diploma holders would be placed at the bottom of the seniority list. For that, the Petitioner herein has already made representation before the Respondents vide Annexure P-9 which is still pending for consideration, therefore, it is prayed by the Counsel that the instant petition may be disposed of directing the Respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation of the Petitioner (Annexure P-9) in light of observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court as referred above. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent/State submits that if this Court directs then representation of the Petitioner may be considered by the Respondents/competent authorities within a stipulated period which may be fixed by this Court. 3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 4. On examination of the documents produced by the Petitioner clearly shows that before his appointment as Sub-Engineer, the Petitioner was holding the graduate degree. Therefore, the case of the Petitioner for grant of seniority over and above to Respondents No.3 is being governed by statutory Governing Rules 1968 and the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Ramesh Kumar (Supra), therefore, considering this aspect, the Petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent/competent authority to decide the pending representation (Annexure P-9) of the Petitioner for grant of seniority over and above to Respondents No.3 accordance with statutory governing Rules and the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Ramesh Kumar (Supra) and also after verification of the service record of the petitioner and pass an order within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned who may affect by the order passed by the authority, if any. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok